J.J. Abrams: My Star Trek Movie Is Not For Trekkies!

Open mind? What the... is this the soft way to tell all previous ST fans that your movie won't hold up to our expectations?

Reply

As someone that used to be fairly heavy treky for many years, I can only welcome such news...

I been burned out on Star Trek for a while now... Star Trek, has really been spread thin, and story telling has been lost in the serries. For me, Paramound so badly mangled the universe, I did not see the last movie untill it had been out on video for two years.

And Enterprise? Gag me before I get started...

So if J.J. Abrams is going to take star trek into a bold dirrection, fine... Im burned out, and anything that pulls the serries back up is a welcome changed... Just please... No more weak action scenes riped off from other movies... secound... Keep the threat leave reasonable and realistic... and finaly NOOOO jerky story telling.

Reply

I think Abrams prefers those unfamiliar with Trek because the comparison will be embarrassing. If they cut the heart out of the franchise and turn it into just another special effects display like MI3, then there's really no point in going. I have all the episodes of DS9 and Enterprise at home to watch again at my leisure. I am sorry for Majel to see Roddenberry's dream sold out rather than simply put to honorable rest.

Reply

If this movie isn't going to be for Trek fans, who will go see it? People who have been vaguely interested in the series/movies/universe for the past thirty-plus years but have never bothered to watch any of it? People who randomly choose a movie according to the showtimes? I am a huge Trek fan and was an avid Alias watcher for the earlier seasons so I have a couple of reasons to *want* to be interested in this movie, but I'm just not at the moment.

Reply

Nothing in the EW article suggests a reboot, and nothing that JJ Abrams says now contradicts his prior statements, which repeatedly express a respect for canon and empathy toward Star Trek fans.

In May, 2006, during an interview with the Irish Times: "Being involved with a series that has a passionate and vocal following makes me incredibly sympathetic," said JJ toward Trek fans. "They have put up with so many incarnations along the way. These fans, they are a smart bunch. They are an intelligent group. We are very respectful and we have no intention of subverting the material."

In July, 2006, Abrams told TV Guide that his film "very much honors the canon of Star Trek. On the other hand, it won't be like anything you've seen before."

Reply

First of all let me say that I was raised by a fanatical Trek fan and dearly love the old series and most of the next generation, having said that I would like to say about freakin' time! Begining with DS9 and the final few seasons of next generation this franchise has steadily gone further and further downhill and an overhaul was inevitable and long overdue, if not there would not be another Star Trek in the works. The films and shows created since Roddenbery's death have been mediocre at best and downright tragic at worst. After watching the premiere of DS9 I knew it was over for the Star Trek franchise, and sadly history would prove my suspicions correct. The people running the ship these days just can't seem to recreate the magic Roddenbery brought to both the big and small screens, yet they try and try never realizing that they're jabbing a knife in the heart of what they love and revere by trying to cling to the past. The sad fact is that Trek today sucks, plain and simple. When the formula stops yielding results you have to go back to the drawing board, look at Batman Begins and Casino Royale. A few weeks ago I went with friends to see Casino Royale, which I thoroughly enjoyed Daniel Craig plays a no-nonsense, back to basics Bond without all the gadgetry and hoo-haas that have undermined both the critical and financial sucess of the franchise. Incidentally Casino Royale is now the highest grossing Bond film of all time. My friend however was not as favorably impressed, both of us are long time Bond fans and I personally felt as though the new 007 was a breath of fresh air after years of stagnation, he thought that it was an abomination. The realistic truth is that if this Bond didn't do well there likely would not have been another one, and that it was equally apperent that audiences were tired of ridiculous gadgets and cheezeball one-liners. The same could be said of Batman Begins, now let me say that I have been a die hard Batfan for over twenty years and secretly despised the movies afraid to speak out against the denegration of the Dark Knight's name, mo actor who has ever played the role of Batman has ever captured the charecter from the comic book, period. Don't get me wrong the first two Batman movies were ok

Reply

Hmm. Seems like people that are going to pay $10 to see a sci-fi movie, are the ones who are into sci fi movies. And those people probably have a rudimentary understanding of Star Trek.

I had faith in this movie until now. JJ Abrams can't possibly be as stupid as these comments make him out to be. Batman Begins was a great movie, but my mother and father didn't go see it because they could care less about Batman - no matter how many times the newspaper sledghammered it into everyone's head how great it was. If you don't care about it - YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT IT. Pretty basic fundamental understanding of humanity.

Reply

What?!

Maybe someone hasn't told this guy, but it's possible to produce a Trek film that will not only fit into everything Trekkies know, but be easy to follow for non-Trekkies. A perfect example in "The Wrath of Kahn." People who've seen the TOS episode "Space Seed" would recognize everything as a continuation of what's already occured. And people who expect nothing but a good space battle get what they want, and more. And in both cases, it's done without taking away from the experience for either group.

Reply

I'm very concerned.

The above article mentioned that "Nemesis" only made half of it's budget back... well... that's because the movie was, for lack of a better word, awful. I *love* Trek. Nemesis's plot was a total non-issue. Hence, the movie failed miserably.
Just because a movie has the words "Star Trek" in the title does not mean it will turn a profit... it has to be good - and by good I mean something the millions of fans already in existance want to see. Sure, it doesn't hurt to bring in people new to the franchise... but ignoring the history of Trek for a "re-boot" in the *hopes* of bringing in new blood to the theatre - that's just... illogical.

Millions of fans world wide would *die* to see a new Trek movie based on the existing story that has been built over the last 40 years. Make a good film with an interesting plot and hold fast to what makes Star Trek a world renowned phenomenon - and you will have an incredibly successful film. ...Fly in the face of everything Star Trek is and insult the millions of people who've devoted so much to the franchise - not to mention the past 40 years - and the film will fail.

I guess time will tell.

I just hope JJ has been as much of a Trek fan as most of us. I know he likes Trek - I just don't know how much. The man created/co-created Lost - and I live for that show now. LOL So... here's hoping.

Reply

Well, i think paramount and abrams are out of their minds.
sorry to burst both bubbles, but JJ is not G.R., he could never hope to be. stop trying to expand the star trek universe and instead put a microscope to the parts of federation history currently unexplored - the enterprise B or C, or an entire series based at the beginning of a time period circa the federation/cardassian war.

all the material you need for 25 more years of star trek already exists; if those involved would put aside their self-righteous pride and realize G.R. created a lot more than a sum of technical manuals and screenplay approvals. there's star trek lore with simple data that could be expanded. I personally would like to see the enterprise C and the federation/cardassian war in a TV series or movie; Perhaps Ben Maxwell from the USS Phoenix in TNG can be the main character as captain, and bring back the familiar face of miles o'brian, while following the first few years of Dr. Tsung's android obsession. there's so much already there...

as michaelangelo stated, "the sculpture is already in the rock; i simply chipped away the excess pieces."

i beg paramount to consider this and follow suit; if JJ's 'new' and 'visionary' concepts end up tarnishing ST reputation with its life long fans(seems already to have done so), the entire franchise name "Star Trek" will be ruined; a safer course would be to explore the nooks and crannies that were opened during G.R.'s life, but never fully explored. Enterprise-B with a captain struggling to meet expectations set by a captain of kirk's caliber; the enterprise C during a time of turmoil and alpha/beta-quadrant unrest. both have enormous potential and dont end up risking what Star Trek means to the fans it already DOES have.

Reply

I love the old Trek series, I hope J.J's film can live up to the glory of the old Trek series. For a laugh check out this spoof of the series posted on Steven Spielberg's new reality T.V. show "the lot":
http://films.thelot.com/films/21427

Reply